Dutch Investigators Give Results of MH17 Probe to Families

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And thanks
for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin
away!

Stop asking for what has been handed to you on a silver platter. Feel free to join any of the threads that dissect the issues, or bring the issues
already on the table there, here. Better yet, start your own thread critiquing the JIT report. If you don't do it today, I will do it tomorrow and you
probably won't like it because I am as likely to expose Russian lies and bias as I am those of the Western media.

....aaaaaaaand for the 50th time - word legitimate mean anything to you? The definition 9f evidence which I have described a few pages back to you
personally mean anything to you? Why you forget so quickly and go back to answering questions that were not asked?

The evidence was provided. If you refuse to accept it thats your issue and doesn't change the facts. In a few weeks when Russia comes out with
another "theory" thats not supported by reality will you change your tune and defend the new lie?

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And thanks
for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin
away!

Specifically what propaganda and can you post sources that refute what you think is propaganda?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
That was a low flying mil cargo plane, probably shot down with a mobile SAM. You should read the dutch intel report and ask your Western Media outlets
to inform the public properly.

No it was MH-17 and it goes back to certain people refusing to accept facts / evidence provided directly by the rebels. Maybe next time they will use
secure communications before bragging about downing an aircraft only to then talk about it being a civilian airliner they shot down.

[...]Prior to the crash, the MIVD knew that, in addition to light aircraft artillery, the Separatists also possessed short-range portable air
defence systems (man-portable air-defence systems; MANPADS) and that they possibly possessed short-range vehicle-borne air-defence systems. Both types
of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range they do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising
altitude.

On 29 June 2014, the Separatists captured a Ukrainian armed forces military base in Donetsk. At this base, there were Buk missile systems.25 These are
powerful anti-aircraft systems. This development was reported extensively in the media prior to the crash. The MIVD also received intelligence
information on the subject, on 30 June and 3 July 2014 as well as on other dates. During the course of July, several reliable sources indicated that
the systems that were at the military base were not operational. Therefore, they could not be used by the Separatists.

[...]

On 14 July 2014, an An-26 military cargo aeroplane (referred to hereafter as: the Antonov), belonging to the Ukrainian airforce, was shot down. The
Ukrainian authorities reported the event the same day in a briefing with Ukraine’s presidential administration in Kiev. The MIVD also received a
concise report of the briefing from the Dutch Defence attaché. The report revealed that the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klimkin, declared
that the situation in the east had reached a new and dangerous phase because the Russian Federation was now openly providing the Separatists with
military support. As an example of the escalation, Klimkin cited the Antonov’s being shot down in the area of Lugansk. Klimkin reported that the
Antonov was flying at an altitude of 6,200 metres and could only have been hit with Russian equipment, because the Separatists did not possess this
kind of anti-aircraft systems. According to a media report on 14 July 2014 (which the MIVD possessed), the Ukrainian authorities stated that the
aeroplane was flying at 6,500 metres and was not shot down by a portable anti-aircraft system but by a more powerful system. This was probably carried
out from Russian territory. In the media, the Separatists claimed that they had shot down the aeroplane and taken some of the crew
prisoner.[...]

SAM only, there you have it. Which is why the investigation came up with this russian Buk spin to begin with. It's not about refusing facts but rather
about refusing factoids.
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, you know the drill. Maybe we should ask the US of A for some satellite data or something?

The rebels thought they were downing a military transport. When they arrived at the scene they discovered it was a civilian airliner. From that
moment the rebels / russia have been trying to blame everyone and everything else.

Yes - certain people are ignoring facts simply because they dont support the Russian version of events. As I and others have noted before. How many
lies can Russia tell regarding the shootdown before people see and understand they are lying? The west's position has been consistent since the
beginning.

Russia / Russian rebels cant make that same claim and they have given multiple "explanations" since day one. When they push a "story", and the story
is debunked by the facts, they move on to the next lie.

Prime example - Russia / Russian MoD swore up and down MH-17 was shot down by a Ukrainian military jet. They produced radar supposedly showing it.
They even aired an interview with a Ukrainian fighter pilot" who was present in the air when the plane was shot down.

Russia lied... The fake pilot lied... The Russian MoD lied... The radar intercepts were fraudulent... The "picture" showing a mig shooting an air to
air missile at Mh-17 was fraudulent...

and people dont understand why Russia is not trusted on this topic.

I trust the Netherlands investigation. I dont trust Russia given their history on this topic.

I firmly believe Russia has culpability in the downing of MH-17 and that is the reason they vetoed the tribunal resolution in the UN. If Russia
agreed to the tribunal they knew they couldn't just dismiss it when the report came out.

The rebels thought they were downing a military transport. When they arrived at the scene they discovered it was a civilian airliner. From that moment
the rebels / russia have been trying to blame everyone and everything else.

That's your opinion, which reminds me of some vids with rebels at the scene and how the Western Media portrayed them as ruthless killers. Remember
that story as well? Pretty sick propaganda and the MSM is full of it.

Which is why I'm here and not there, if you catch my drift.

I trust the Netherlands investigation.

And I have my issues with all that SBU/ Higgins disinfo to be frank.

The Dutch had a keen eye on the Russians, I doubt that they would be able to cross the border without anyone taking notice. A phone call and some
Bellingcats is all we get in support of the allegation, that Russia decided to directly mess with this war in Ukraine. And we get Putinista labeled
for speaking up, which is pretty hilarious btw. Who's trolling whom now, I'm confused.

The evidence was provided. If you refuse to accept it thats your issue and doesn't change the facts. In a few weeks when Russia comes out with
another "theory" thats not supported by reality will you change your tune and defend the new lie?

Well no its from the intercepted phone conversation between the rebels and their handelers when they arrived on scene and realized they shot down a
civilian jetliner.

Feel free to specify what "disinfo" you are talking about and refute it please so we can see what you are talking about.

How do you know? Because the tv told you so? SBU could have manufactured it. They had the means and 1000 good reasons.

Not saying that they did, the phonecalls could be genuine for all I know, but the possibility is there and the authenticity has not been proven. That
makes them a theory, not a fact. Accusations are never based on theories...

Maybe someone from the rebels believed they shot something down, yes. The actual context of both phone calls is up to debate and only the callers are
really in the known, even if the SBU didn't produce this sort of 'evidence'. Which wouldn't be surprising either, would it?

More to the point, they admitted at the time (as reported by the Russian state news agency TASS) that they had shot down a large aircraft with a
missile.

Why would they have lied? Before they discovered that it wasnt a Ukrainian military aircraft after all .....

This remains the elephant in the room for those who claim that the rebels were not responsible.

Surprisingly TASS still have that article on their website.

They published it July 17, 2014, 20:01

DONETSK, July 17. /ITAR-TASS/. The mlitia of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) have brought down a military transport
Antonov-26 (An-26) plane of the Ukrainian Air Force on the outskirts of the town of Torez, eyewitnesses said. A missile hit the An-26, it fell on the
ground and caught blaze, they said. On July 14, militiamen of the self-proclaimed Lugansk People’s Republic downed another An-26 of the Ukrainian
Air Force. More: tass.ru...

Hoi Western Media, that's not how open discussions work. You may censor the comment section in your MSM world if you like, but this is ATS. And
thanks for all the recent propaganda btw, but your Information Warfare is a tad too obvious for my taste.
Being in my head, I don't need a point by point debunk of this investigation when I see how our Western Media acts right here, right now. Spin away!

In other words, you cannot debunk the investigation on any specific point, so you will settle for a blanket accusation against western media. That is
not how open discussion works, either. As for censoring comments, I have no idea why you brought that up... this isn't Russia, you know.

Anyone calling themselves "Public Opinion" is in no position to accuse someone else of "information warfare!"

Description: The 57E6-E is a two-stage, solid-fuel, medium-range surface-to-air missile extremely flexible which allows for engagement of
airborne threats at ranges from 1.2 to 20 kilometers and altitudes from 5 to 10,000 meters.

You seem to miss the fact that a separatist leader admitted to having an operational BUK in the area when MH 17 was shot down...maybe you can answer
this question for me...it's one that nobody backing Russia's innocence has answered.

What would Ukraine need to be using a BUK for when the separatists had no aircraft flying in this conflict, but interestingly enough Ukraine did so
who had more reason to use a BUK at that time...and who was shooting down aircraft at the time?

Seems you are forgetting that simple part of the equasion.

So you talk about informing the public correctly...when has anything coming from Russia ever been the truth concerning Ukraine...they lied from the
beginning...remember these?

These were suppose to be locals helping out...till Putin admitted to sending his little green men to Crimea...so do you really want to discuss who is
informing the public properly?

You seem to miss the fact that a separatist leader admitted to having an operational BUK in the area when MH 17 was shot down

You're talking about that interview, in which the Western Media managed to not get the babelfish straight and thus provided a clear piece of
misinformation?

And where's the revolution of the crimean people due to this illegal occupation? You really think they wanted to stay with the Ukraine, this glorious
place with no corruption whatsoever and much love for the russian majority in the east? Err...right.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.